Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Subjects first observed a pair of negotiations between two confederates of the same sex, and then negotiated with one of these confederates. Those who had observed their opponent follow a matching strategy conceded more than those who had observed their opponent follow either a tough or soft strategy. Confederates using a matching strategy were rated as stronger than those using a soft strategy and fairer than those using a tough strategy. These results support an attributional explanation for a previous finding that use of a matching strategy tends to encourage concessions from an adversary. Other results suggest that observers of negotiation view the parties they are observing as contrasting in strength and fairness.
McGillicuddy et al. (Sat,) studied this question.